I agree with the thrust of your post, but don't agree that we should sit back and do nothing. We don't know that the climate is changing or, if it is, why it's changing. And we certainly don't (yet) know how best to stabilise it if it is changing. Kyoto is a complete nonsense, even if the doomsayers are correct in saying both that the climate is changing, and that anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions are the cause. We need a way of achieving a stable climate that doesn't prejudge the best way of doing so, and doesn't assume that the climate is necessarily changing. In short, let the market decide on how much to spend on achieving a climate stability objective. We should reward the successful
achievement of climate stability, while minimising the economic cost.